Module 3 Assignment [[file/view/2011Curriculum+Central+Proposer+Workshop.doc|2011Curriculum Central Proposer Workshop.doc]]
The document above is used to help faculty learn how to enter course outline information into a custom database. Database entry is a new activity for faculty at one of the community colleges in the University of Hawai'i system. The database functionality is evolving and the how-to directions often need to be updated. Workshops are offered in a hands-on setting in a computer classroom, but many faculty prefer to learn on their own by reading the document and watching the narrated JING screencasts.
An external influence on the instructional materials is the pressure to have all course outlines entered into the database in a timely manner in order to meet expectations of an external accrediting body. Additionally, the links between (1) course content and course competencies, (2) course competencies and methods of evaluation, (3) course competencies and program student learning outcomes, and (4) general education student learning outcomes and methods of evaluation were not previously required and were not previously part of the course outlines. Again, the new requirements are based on the expectations of the accrediting body.
An internal influence on the revision of the instructional materials is the faculty to staff ratio (200:1). Individual one-on-one assistance is not possible for all faculty, though it has been offered and given to faculty who request it. Group trainings have been successful for short term. Some faculty have used the instructional materials and have been successful in populating multiple course outlines. Many faculty have needed feedback, from minor to major. Successful completion of the approval process, from initial data entry/population of the fields through nine levels of reviewers and approvers, has been as short as two months and as long as two years. It is hoped/assumed that more complete and correct population of the fields in the course outlines will result in (A) a greater percentage of successful approvals in a shorter time, (B) a decrease in the one-on-one time between staff and faculty for routine issues, (C) a decrease in required feedback from staff, faculty reviewers, and approvers, (D) a higher percentage of course outlines entered into the database, and (E) an erasure of the perception/reputation on campus that the data entry is difficult (if not impossible) and time consuming.
An additional influence on the revision of the instructional materials (and an additional argument for templates) is the changes in the database. The database is custom made for the University of Hawaii system. The programmer often makes changes to the functionality, sometimes with the advice and consent of the steering/advisory committee, sometimes without.
The document above is used to help faculty learn how to enter course outline information into a custom database. Database entry is a new activity for faculty at one of the community colleges in the University of Hawai'i system. The database functionality is evolving and the how-to directions often need to be updated. Workshops are offered in a hands-on setting in a computer classroom, but many faculty prefer to learn on their own by reading the document and watching the narrated JING screencasts.
An external influence on the instructional materials is the pressure to have all course outlines entered into the database in a timely manner in order to meet expectations of an external accrediting body. Additionally, the links between (1) course content and course competencies, (2) course competencies and methods of evaluation, (3) course competencies and program student learning outcomes, and (4) general education student learning outcomes and methods of evaluation were not previously required and were not previously part of the course outlines. Again, the new requirements are based on the expectations of the accrediting body.
An internal influence on the revision of the instructional materials is the faculty to staff ratio (200:1). Individual one-on-one assistance is not possible for all faculty, though it has been offered and given to faculty who request it. Group trainings have been successful for short term. Some faculty have used the instructional materials and have been successful in populating multiple course outlines. Many faculty have needed feedback, from minor to major. Successful completion of the approval process, from initial data entry/population of the fields through nine levels of reviewers and approvers, has been as short as two months and as long as two years. It is hoped/assumed that more complete and correct population of the fields in the course outlines will result in (A) a greater percentage of successful approvals in a shorter time, (B) a decrease in the one-on-one time between staff and faculty for routine issues, (C) a decrease in required feedback from staff, faculty reviewers, and approvers, (D) a higher percentage of course outlines entered into the database, and (E) an erasure of the perception/reputation on campus that the data entry is difficult (if not impossible) and time consuming.
An additional influence on the revision of the instructional materials (and an additional argument for templates) is the changes in the database. The database is custom made for the University of Hawaii system. The programmer often makes changes to the functionality, sometimes with the advice and consent of the steering/advisory committee, sometimes without.